I am skeptical that these are really the top contenders. The list assumes that they will keep the modular spec and chooses these 3 mainly based on that feature. It does not site anyone actually involved in the process. It is nothing more than an opinion piece with a misleading headline.

IMHO the Sig, Glock, S&W and Beretta are top contenders. There is a lot of time before the "real" process begins and I would not be surprised to see some changes made in the requirements.

STI Detonics could never deliver the number of pistols required of the contract. I don't think STI and Detonics combined have produced 450,000 pistols.

__________________
-The right to be left alone is the most comprehensive of rights, and the right most valued by free people.-Louis Brandeis
-Its a tool box... I don't care you put the tools in for the job that's all... -Sam from Ronin
-It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. -Aristotle

If the military has to have a 9MM, and needs high capacity, they should just adopt the BHP and teach the personnel how to use it. Those Berettas were why too big and clumsy, the BHP just right. Committees always make things too complicated and over-think the issue. What the heck is wrong with this?

I would like more detail on what exactly qualifies as "modular." I would think that with interchangeable back strap and grip sizes, both the M&P and Glock (Gen4) would qualify. Also, the match grade accuracy requirement seems unnecessary.

dahermit If the military has to have a 9MM, and needs high capacity, they should just adopt the BHP and teach the personnel how to use it. Those Berettas were why too big and clumsy, the BHP just right. Committees always make things too complicated and over-think the issue. What the heck is wrong with this?

I have more than a dozen Hi Powers (prewar, postwar, T series, C series, MkII's, MkIII's, Inglis). It is my all time favorite handgun, but there is no way in heck I would favor it as a military handgun today.

BHP- steel and heavy, requiring more maintenance, has lesser mag capacity, more expensive to manufacture, requires a knowledgeable gunsmith/armorer to properly fit parts. The manual of arms for a single action semi auto is more complicated.
VS.
Glock 17-it's plastic, its lighter, it isn't going to rust, it can run +P+ all day long with virtually no wear, cheaper to manufacture, higher mag capacity, gunsmithing is done with a pin punch, Very simple manual of arms.

If JMB & Dieudonne Saive were alive today I think they would feel the same.

I'm shocked that Detonics is even still in business. Even if they do have a good pistol, a Detonics/STI pistol sounds hilariously expensive. And, at STI's current production capacity, it would take OVER THIRTY YEARS to make enough pistols.

I'm disappointed that Ruger doesn't have an entry, and surprised that FN doesn't either.

Quote:

If it happens, it will come down to either Glock, Sig, or S&W's ability to successfully wheel and deal behind the curtain and swap contracts and jobs, etc.

Just issue revolvers and be done with it. 38/357 is the original modular handgun.

The military doesn't need a new pistol, the money would be better spent on training to use the weapons (rifles mainly) that they have.

We don't let our soldiers protect themselves now because "there might be an accidental discharge".

If true, that's not a gun problem, that's not a soldier problem, that's a training problem brought on by a command problem.

There is much wisdom here. All this money spent for bidding for a pistol.

Get new Beretta, get a new M&P, get a new Glock whatever. Get proven technology, cut the check and move on in about the time it took me to type this. The whole process everything that wrong with government procurement.

IMO differant sized back-straps are not a modular design, still the same frame. Even if that was accepted as "modular", Glock would have to come up with a manual safety I would think. The little bit I have been able to find about the Beretta, it has a manual safety option. And I'm assuming that the Sig 320 has a fire control group for this trial with one. Edit to add; I see that the SIG 320 does indeed has a thumb safety model.

Quote:
Just issue revolvers and be done with it. 38/357 is the original modular handgun.

The military doesn't need a new pistol, the money would be better spent on training to use the weapons (rifles mainly) that they have.

We don't let our soldiers protect themselves now because "there might be an accidental discharge".

If true, that's not a gun problem, that's not a soldier problem, that's a training problem brought on by a command problem.
There is much wisdom here. All this money spent for bidding for a pistol.

Get new Beretta, get a new M&P, get a new Glock whatever. Get proven technology, cut the check and move on in about the time it took me to type this. The whole process everything that wrong with government procurement.

Well this is the world of DoD procurement; the XM17 solicitation is a "Fair and Open Competition" where they have to do a long drawn out bidding and down selection process and a long drawn out pistol trials evaluation process, just so they can replicate what the British MoD went through three years ago. The Brits chose the Glock 17 which was already in use by NATO forces, and the combat track record for the G-17 in Iraq and Afghanistan by NATO forces has been excellent by most accounts. But no matter, the U.S. Military has to recreate the wheel and put its own thumbstamp of approval on the M9 replacement, regardless of what the rest of NATO has already accomplished.

__________________
Words to Live By: Before You Pray - Believe; Before You Speak - Listen; Before You Spend - Earn; Before You Write - Think; Before You Quit - Try; Before You Die - Live

Such an infinitely minute component of any military campaign. One could almost call them irrelevant... almost but not quite. Who really gives a rats patoot what they choose? Any halfway decent auto will fill the need, from the Walther P1 all the way to the FN Five-Seven. It's a badge of rank and a last ditch weapon. Those who use them for spec ops already get what they need. For everyone else it's scarcely worth it's bulk. Make it light, out of the road, simple, and hi-cap.

Buy some 4" plastic frame guns from Smith, Ruger or Glock, and move on to something that matters.

I heard a few years ago that US Army Tank Command was switching to .45 ACP Ruger P-series guns. Don't know if that panned out, but if so it seems comically, laughably, fitting.

__________________
You'll probably never NEED a gun. I hope you never do. But IF you do, you will need it worse than anything you've ever needed in your life.

IF we're not supposed to eat animals,
howcome God made 'em outta meat?

samsmix....Ruger P Series?...thats very surprising. I am curious as to why you find it " laughable"?

I had the opportunity to shoot a friends Ruger 9E alongside my new M&P 9 yesterday (I have, in addition, a P90 and P97 as well as Colt and Springfield 1911s)

I was impressed with the 9Es ergonomics. I have relatively small hands and the grip on the 9E almost felt too small even with the arched back strap ( it reverses to flat ) It is very 1911 like in it's feel.

It is ambi and has a safety and I believe it is modular and was $339 OTD. I don't know about it's potential longevity but I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be a contender given it's apparent user friendliness for all sizes of troops.

IIRC, one of the criteria is the gun must be "unit armorer serviceable" While the SiG 320 is simple to swap fire control units between frames, the lockwork itself is fairly complicated and is the serialized part.

My (out of left field) take on the Detonics/STI entry would be DoD buys the design TDP and farms out production to Colt (thus saving the company), or FN (thus killing Colt for good).

And your next question is from the line of Andrea James. Please go ahead.Andrea Susan James - Dougherty & Co. LLC

Thanks for taking my follow-up. There is a lot of industry chatter about this new army sidearm upgrade. And I just wanted to ask, do you plan on throwing a pistol into the ring, and then also in general, what's your take on the pros and cons of going after the professional market? Thank you.

Michael O. Fifer - Chief Executive Officer & Director

Quick take on the pros and cons, Andrea, is that there's enormous cause to participate and an extremely low likelihood for any one company of winning it. And there's been a lot of talk now that maybe they don't need to change caliber that maybe 9 millimeter is okay. And if that really becomes the driving force, and from a budget perspective, it probably will, especially as the military considers use of hollow point ammo instead of strictly ball ammo, that makes the 9 millimeter phenomenally more effective as the stopping weapon.

I think it's highly likely that Berreta (57:45) would get to keep it. They'd find a way to do a little cost reduction, a little bit of product improvement. And from a logistics perspective, which drives a huge portion of their budget, they're going to be nuts to change. They'd be much better off, pretty much with what they've got. And so, that adds to the risk factor of putting the huge investment of time, people and money into competing for something that there's really very low likelihood of winning even if you have a much better product. And so those are kind of the pros and cons right there. If you win it, obviously you're in the capital receipt for the next 25 years, but I have a feeling competing for it's going to be a little bit like being hit against a brick wall, and you'll feel real good when you stop.

Why do I find it comical, even laughable? Don't get me wrong, the P-series guns are reliable and accurate. They do what they are supposed to do. The problem most people have with them is that they are big, heavy, and...well...tank-like. If any outfit was going to go to the P-series, a tank outfit would (comically) make sense.

As far as the SR-9 & 9E goes I really like them. I think it would be one of the best of all possible choices and would reclaim the title of "Made in America" (yes I know M9s are mad here). They are some of my favorite poly pistols. They seem to be viewed on the market as lower quality than Glock, XD, SIG, etc though, and I attribute this to the bad taste people had in their mouth about Ruger autos as a result of the P-series. Let's face it, while effective the P-series was something less than elegant.

__________________
You'll probably never NEED a gun. I hope you never do. But IF you do, you will need it worse than anything you've ever needed in your life.

IF we're not supposed to eat animals,
howcome God made 'em outta meat?

This email link is to reach site administrators for assistance, if you cannot access TFL via other means. If you are a TFL member and can access TFL, please do not use this link; instead, use the forums (like Questions, Suggestions, and Tech Support) or PM an appropriate mod or admin.

If you are experiencing difficulties posting in the Buy/Sell/Trade subforums of TFL, please read the "sticky" announcement threads at the top of the applicable subforum. If you still feel you are qualified to post in those subforums, please contact "Shane Tuttle" (the mod for that portion of TFL) via Private Message for assistance.

This email contact address is not an "Ask the Firearms Expert" service. Such emails will be ignored. If you have a firearm related question, please register and post it on the forums.